TechRadar News

Generative AI is changing the software development game. Beyond its capabilities in IT automation, the tool is also empowering professionals to contribute where it matters most, specifically at the strategic level.

This is the case of developers, who are no longer confined to their expectations of simply building applications but are increasingly becoming more involved with strategic business outcomes.

Gartner predicts that by 2028, 75% of enterprise software engineers will use AI. This figure doesn’t just represent technological advancements and the growing role of generative AI in enterprise software but also serves as a wakeup call for businesses to rethink the role of their developers.

The connecting factor

Organizations need to recognize that developers are the connecting factor between their needs and digital solutions. Those that recognize this early on and harness developer expertise will be those that succeed ahead.

This shift is already underway across multiple industries. In healthcare, for example, developers are addressing clinical needs by designing solutions that reduce operational friction, giving practitioners more time to focus on patient care.

In financial services, they are driving growth in a highly regulated and competitive environment, enhancing fraud detection while making financial services accessible and convenient for customers.

Meanwhile, in the retail sector, developers are elevating the technologies behind customer experiences to meet rising expectations. Across the board, developers are emerging as strategic innovators, leveraging technology, not just to solve problems, but to deliver meaningful business outcomes.

Developers are keepers of insight

Across sectors, businesses are beginning to rethink how they engage with their developers. The conversation is now shifting from basic interaction to empowering them to contribute strategically.

With developers holding a deeper understanding of their business's needs, they are more frequently asking to be heard and consulted upon the innovation strategy to better support business objectives.

Therefore, unlocking the potential of AI will require a mindset shift - one that acknowledges generative AI’s role not just to accelerate development but also elevate individuals behind it. To move forward, organizations need to recognize the value that developers bring to the table; including solving the issues that generative AI alone cannot solve.

Empowering developers: how low-code and AI are redefining complexity

Object oriented low-code and no-code platforms and generative AI have fundamentally changed how developers can leverage their business relevance in their organizations. By eliminating some of the complexity of line-by-line code development, this allows them to move quickly from idea to implementation, creating more room for innovation, experimentation, and collaboration with other stakeholders.

As a result, developers are finding it easier to take a much bigger seat at the table, thereby helping to guide business strategy. Developers bring unique value: they are embedded in systems, close to the problems that need solving, and often have first-hand insight into operational inefficiencies and user frustrations. They understand the organization not just from a technical perspective, but from a business one.

Low-code and generative AI free developers from repetitive, technical tasks and enable them to focus on solving real business problems. As a result, developers are no longer just responding to requirements - they are helping to shape them. This shift gives developers a greater voice in strategic discussions and positions them as key players in driving business success.

Generative AI as a copilot

Generative AI copilots go beyond traditional tools by actively assisting developers throughout the software development lifecycle. Instead of working within rigid frameworks that slow innovation, developers can now brainstorm ideas and instantly generate code, receive intelligent suggestions, automate repetitive routine tasks, like debugging, or documentation. These copilots act as intelligent partners, freeing developers to concentrate on solving high-impact problems faster.

The critical advantage of a DevOps team with time, is their ability to more proactively engage with the overall direction of business. Generative AI amplifies the value of human insight further by enabling developers to focus on the work that matters most including creativity, judgement, and a deep understanding of organizational context. In addition, when generative AI is paired with low-code, developers have a co-pilot aiding them on the journey to create better applications and services for the industry they work in.

Developers delivering value across industries

An industry where the shift in developers offering insights is most apparent is in healthcare. The development of applications in this sector isn’t just about building tools, but more importantly reducing friction for clinical practitioners and returning time to patient care.

Developers who understand the pain points and frustrations clinical staff face, are better equipped to create applications that minimize these complexities. Generative AI and low-code development platforms make it possible to quickly build, iterate, and improve these tools, resulting in better alignment between healthcare technology and frontline needs.

Another telling example is the financial services sector where 75% of financial firms already use AI. Developers are able to redirect their focus from routine tasks and offer value by modernizing legacy systems, streamlining compliance and enhancing fraud detection, all while supporting rapid product innovation.

Building solutions

In a tightly regulated industry, their ability to build secure, efficient and customer-centric solutions is critical. Developers offer real value by creating solutions without compromising safety or security. With AI, developers can move faster, meet regulatory requirements, and deliver personalized experiences that build trust and retention.

In retail, developers are using customer feedback to solve friction points in the shopping journey. They are building tools that personalize the user experience, boost satisfaction and increase sales. With AI and low=code automating routine tasks, developers can focus on innovation, from responding to consumer trends to improving supply chain resilience.

Across sectors, the combination of generative AI, low-code platforms, and developer insight is accelerating innovation and unlocking strategic business value.

Time to push the needle

It is time for businesses to push the needle, not just to adopt generative AI but also to empower developers to lead innovatively. With the use of generative AI and AI-powered low-code, developers can reallocate time that they can then reinvest towards targeting strategic business needs. Thanks to their strong understanding of business needs and pain points, developers are able to shape solutions that align digital solutions with business objectives.

Successful businesses will be those that recognize that AI will not be replacing developers but rather promoting them to more strategic roles.

We list the best sites for hiring developers.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro

The Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7 might just reel me back into using a vertical-style flip phone. I used to count on the Galaxy Z Flip 5 before I got my S24 Ultra, finding the handset to be more than capable of keeping up with my daily needs while also offering an immense level of cool. The Galaxy Z Flip 7 keeps the cool factor going, with an exceptionally minimized crease and a cover display that I just can’t help but love.

If you’re not aware, the cover screen is an essential component of any foldable smartphone. It allows for functionality when the primary screen is inaccessible due to being closed like a clamshell. It can also be used to take selfies using the rear cameras, conveniently placed at the bottom of the cover screen, or top of the phone.

Now, for a lot of foldables, the cover screen isn’t feature rich – by default. To maintain a seamlessly premium feel, Samsung actively restricts how much a user can do with the screen to a handful of supported widgets and cover screen elements. It’s not a bad idea and it keeps the level of polish to a high standard, but some folks, like me, may be left wanting to do more with the conveniently small screen. Thankfully Samsung has an easy solution to this – Multistar.

Give Multistar a go

(Image credit: Zachariah Kelly / TechRadar)

Multistar isn’t new. It’s been around for several generations of the Galaxy Z Flip, but it’s always been limited by how small the cover screen is. That’s no longer an issue with the Galaxy Z Flip 7, with its cover screen spanning the entire top of the folded phone.

Multistar is an essential piece of the puzzle. This official Samsung extension, accessible through the phone’s cover screen settings and then downloaded from the Galaxy Store, allows you to put apps directly onto one of the widget menus of the cover screen, allowing you to swipe through Bluesky or even play games like Crossy Road.

It’s not a complete solution – the screen doesn’t display notification bar information, navigating between apps is extremely basic (limited to a single swipe up) and indeed some apps are still inaccessible, such as Samsung’s own contacts and phone apps – but it does feel more useful than previous generations of the Flip, and I feel like I could sufficiently use much of my smartphone with just this small screen and my selected apps.

(Image credit: Zachariah Kelly / TechRadar)But is it worth the extra cost?

As much as I love the cover screen, its functionality, and the concept of a compact, square phone over a plain rectangle, it's hard to justify the higher price – especially with a more affordable option on the market.

Alongside the Galaxy Z Flip 7, Samsung also released the Z Flip 7 FE, a cheaper handset with many of the same specs found in the Z Flip 6 – including its smaller cover screen that’s capable of a lot of the same functionality. Similarly, I’d recommend checking out Motorola’s Razr range of foldable smartphones, as those can be used with similar utility when it comes to apps at a more accessible price.

For now though – I’m a big fan of the funny little square I’ve been using instead of a boring rectangle.

You might also like...

• Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7 vs Motorola Razr Ultra 2025: which flip foldable is best?
• Watch the Samsung Galaxy Z Flip 7 go through a torturous durability test that I can't believe it survived
• There’s only one way folding phones can get thinner, but I don’t think it’s time to ditch USB-C ports yet

• Anthropic’s Claude chatbot now has an on-demand memory feature
• The AI will recall past chats only when a user specifically asks
• The feature is rolling out first to Max, Team, and Enterprise subscribers before expanding to other plans

Anthropic has given Claude a memory upgrade, but it will only activate when you choose. The new feature allows Claude to recall past conversations, providing the AI chatbot with information to help continue previous projects and apply what you've discussed before to your next conversation.

The update is coming to Claude’s Max, Team, and Enterprise subscribers first, though it will likely be more widely available at some point. If you have it, you can ask Claude to search for previous messages tied to your workspace or project.

However, unless you explicitly ask, Claude won’t cast an eye backward. That means Claude will maintain a generic sort of personality by default. That's for the sake of privacy, according to Anthropic. Claude can recall your discussions if you want, without creeping into your dialogue uninvited.

By comparison, OpenAI’s ChatGPT automatically stores past chats unless you opt out, and uses them to shape its future responses. Google Gemini goes even further, employing both your conversations with the AI and your Search history and Google account data, at least if you let it. Claude’s approach doesn't pick up the breadcrumbs referencing earlier talks without you asking it to do so.

Claude remembers

Adding memory may not seem like a big deal. Still, you'll feel the impact immediately if you’ve ever tried to restart a project interrupted by days or weeks without a helpful assistant, digital or otherwise. Making it an opt-in choice is a nice touch in accommodating how comfortable people are with AI currently.

Many may want AI help without surrendering control to chatbots that never forget. Claude sidesteps that tension cleanly by making memory something you summon deliberately.

But it’s not magic. Since Claude doesn’t retain a personalized profile, it won’t proactively remind you to prepare for events mentioned in other chats or anticipate style shifts when writing to a colleague versus a public business presentation, unless prompted mid-conversation.

Further, if there are issues with this approach to memory, Anthropic’s rollout strategy will allow the company to correct any mistakes before it becomes widely available to all Claude users. It will also be worth seeing if building long-term context like ChatGPT and Gemini are doing is going to be more appealing or off-putting to users compared to Claude's way of making memory an on-demand aspect of using the AI chatbot.

And that assumes it works perfectly. Retrieval depends on Claude’s ability to surface the right excerpts, not just the most recent or longest chat. If summaries are fuzzy or the context is wrong, you might end up more confused than before. And while the friction of having to ask Claude to use its memory is supposed to be a benefit, it still means you'll have to remember that the feature exists, which some may find annoying. Even so, if Anthropic is right, a little boundary is a good thing, not a limitation. And users will be happy that Claude remembers that, and nothing else, without a request.

You might also like

• You don’t have to explain everything to Claude anymore – it’s finally in your apps
• How Claude’s 3.7's new ‘extended' thinking compares to ChatGPT o1's reasoning
• I tried Claude's new Research feature, and it's just as good as ChatGPT and Google Gemini's Deep Research features

Windows 10 reaches its End of Life in October 2025, and a California resident is particularly disgruntled about this looming deadline.

He isn't alone, of course, but Lawrence Klein feels strongly enough that Microsoft is out of order in bringing the shutters down on Windows 10 in just a couple of months that he has fired up a lawsuit against the company.

As The Register reports, Klein has accused Microsoft of violating consumer legal code and business code (including false advertising law) by winding up support for Windows 10 too early, in his opinion.

The crux of the argument is that too many people remain on Windows 10 for the operating system to have support pulled (there are nuances here, which I'll come back to). And that some 240 million devices don't meet the hardware requirements to upgrade to Windows 11 – due to Microsoft setting those PC specifications at an unreasonable level – and the potential e-waste nightmare that could prompt.

In short, the upgrades required for Windows 11 - including TPM 2.0 security, as well as ruling out some surprisingly recent processors - aren't justified.

Furthermore, Klein argues that this upgrade timeline is all part of Microsoft's drive to push folks to use its Copilot AI with Windows 11, in a broader push to get more adoption for Copilot+ PCs - in other words, to buy new machines and discard old Windows 10 hardware (and again, we're back to that e-waste issue).

You can read the lawsuit in its entirety (it's a PDF) here, but that's the gist, and Klein argues that Microsoft should postpone killing off Windows 10 and wait until far fewer people are using the older operating system.

As the suit states: "[The] Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief requiring Microsoft to continue providing support for Windows 10 without additional fees or conditions until the number of devices running the operating system falls below a reasonable threshold, thereby ensuring that consumers and businesses are not unfairly pressured into unnecessary expenditures and cybersecurity risks [of running a Windows 10 PC without security updates]."

Is Klein justified in this lawsuit? In some respects, I think so, and while I don't imagine for a minute that this legal action will go anywhere in terms of the outcome of the suit itself, I've a feeling it could come into play, and be important, indirectly.

What do I mean by that exactly? Well, let's dive into the thinking behind Klein's lawsuit, and the key reasons why it might force Microsoft to sit up and take notice.

(Image credit: fizkes / Shutterstock)1. Windows 11's hardware requirements really are unreasonable

Do we really need TPM 2.0 forced upon us? Yes, it ushers in a better level of security, I don't dispute that – but hundreds of millions of PCs potentially heading to landfill seems too heavy a price to pay. For me, as already mentioned, the decision to rule out some relatively new CPUs in the Windows 11 specs is particularly baffling.

The key point here is that Microsoft has never pushed the PC hardware requirements as hard as it has with Windows 11, and that leaves it open to criticism, although this observation is nothing new. What is new, though, is that the lack of fairness in setting this higher hardware bar has become crystal clear with the number of people who are still using Windows 10, which brings us onto my next point.

(Image credit: Microsoft)2. This close to End of Life, there are clearly too many people still using Windows 10

The lawsuit cites outdated figures as to how many folks are still on Windows 10 - an estimate drawn from April 2025 suggests that 53% remain on the older OS. While that's no longer the case, the level remains high.

Based on the latest report from StatCounter (for July 2025), Windows 10 usage is 43%, which is very high with the End of Life deadline imminent. Normally, an outgoing Windows version would have way fewer users than this - Windows 7 had a 25% market share when it ran out of support (and it was a popular OS).

There are always holdouts when a new version of Windows comes out, but it's looking like this is going to be really bad with Windows 10's end of support. This is Klein's central argument, and I think it's a key factor that Microsoft doesn't appear to be taking into account - or perhaps doesn't want to face up to.

Maybe the software giant is thinking there'll be a last-minute flood of Windows 11 migration, but given the outlined hardware requirements problem, I doubt it.

(Image credit: NATNN / Shutterstock)3. Proving the cynics right?

Another part of Klein's case against Microsoft is the assertion that the company is using Windows 10's end of support and Windows 11 upgrades to persuade people to buy new PCs that major in AI, namely Copilot+ PCs. And indeed Microsoft hasn't helped itself here, openly pushing these Windows 11 devices as the lawsuit points out – and that includes intrusive full-screen advertisements piped to Windows 10 machines.

That feels like a crass tactic, and makes it seem like part of this is indeed about pushing those Copilot+ laptops. Yes, by all means, advertise Copilot+ PCs and their AI abilities (which are limited thus far, I should note) – but don't do it in this way, directly at Windows 10 users, and expect that to be viewed in anything other than a negative and cynical light.

(Image credit: Shutterstock)4. Microsoft has already made a concession, true - but it's not enough

It's worth noting that not everything Klein puts forward in this suit seems reasonable. I don't think you can argue that 10 years of support is stingy, which is what Microsoft has given Windows 10. However, Klein picks out 'transitional' support in his lawsuit, meaning the length of support after a succeeding OS has been launched – four years in this case – which isn't entirely fair and looks lean. The problem here is not the length of time for support as such, but the different circumstances around hardware requirements.

Also, calling Windows 11 'wildly unpopular' as Klein does at one point is equally unfair - even if adoption of the operating system has been very sluggish, admittedly. There's a definite bias towards shooting the OS down across all fronts, and I think that weakens Klein's argument.

But my main bone of contention here is that Klein ignores the concession Microsoft has made in terms of the extended year of support for consumers who want to stay on Windows 10. As the lawsuit states, this extra support through to October 2026 can be had for the price of $30, but recently, Microsoft introduced the ability to get this extension for free, well, kind of. (Financially, you won't pay a penny, but you need to sync some PC settings to OneDrive, and I don't think that requirement is too onerous myself.)

That was an important move by Microsoft, which it isn't given any credit for here, but that said, I still don't think the company goes far enough. As I've said before, an extra year of support is certainly welcome, but Microsoft needs to look at a further extended program for consumers.

So, while the lawsuit does go off the rails (at least for me) around these issues, it does effectively put a spotlight on how we're looking at measuring support, and a different perspective other than a hard timeframe. Instead of talking about 'x' years of extended coverage, it mentions a level of Windows 10 adoption that should be reached before Microsoft pulls the plug on support for the OS.

I think that's a valuable new angle on this whole affair, and while 10% of total Windows users – which is the low bar Klein sets for Windows 10 – maybe feels too low, there's an interesting conversation to be had here. (The other route Klein's suit suggests, which others have raised, is Microsoft simply relaxing the hardware requirements for Windows 11 - but I think at this stage of the game, we can safely conclude that this won't be happening.)

(Image credit: MAYA LAB / Shutterstock)5. Under pressure

My final point in terms of why this lawsuit could prove a compelling kick in the seat of the pants for Microsoft is that while, as already observed, I can't see Klein triumphing over the company, it's more fuel to the fire in the campaign to stave off a potentially major e-waste catastrophe.

Simply put, the PR around this – and it has been spinning up headlines aplenty over the past couple of days – is another reason for Microsoft to sit up, take notice, and maybe do some rethinking over exactly how Windows 10's End of Life is being implemented.

We've already seen one concession – the aforementioned free route to get extended support for Windows 10 – in recent times, which surely must have been a reaction to the frustration that Klein and many others feel. So, perhaps this lawsuit could be the catalyst to prod Microsoft into going further in its appeasement of the unhappy Windows 10 users out there – fingers crossed, at any rate.

You might also like

• Microsoft finally fixes one frustrating Windows 11 pop-up – just as a more irritating one arrives to take its place
• Microsoft promises to crack one of the biggest problems with Windows 11: slow performance
• Microsoft has all but given up on Windows 11 SE – and it looks like the war against Chromebooks has been lost

• Tesla’s Dojo supercomputer dream ends after leadership changes and mass departures reshape its AI strategy
• The Dojo project looked to revolutionize autonomous driving before internal shifts halted its momentum
• Samsung’s $16.5 billion chip deal with Tesla marks a major turn in AI development

Tesla has shut down its Dojo supercomputer team, in what appears to be a major shift in the company’s artificial intelligence plans.

Reports from Bloomberg claim the decision followed the exit of team leader Peter Bannon and the loss of about 20 other staff members to a newly formed venture called DensityAI.

The remaining team members will now be reassigned to other computing and data center projects within Tesla.

Leadership exit triggers Tesla shake-up

The Dojo system was originally developed around custom training chips designed to process large amounts of driving data and video from Tesla’s electric vehicles.

The aim was to use this information to train the company’s autonomous driving software more efficiently than off-the-shelf systems.

However, CEO Elon Musk said on X it no longer made sense to split resources between two different AI chips.

Tesla has not responded to requests for comment, but Musk has outlined the company’s focus on developing its AI5 and AI6 chips.

He said these would be “excellent for inference and at least pretty good for training” and could be placed in large supercomputer clusters, a configuration he suggested might be called “Dojo 3.”

The company’s shift away from the Dojo project comes amid broader restructuring efforts that have seen multiple executive departures and thousands of job cuts.

Tesla has also been working on integrating AI tools such as the Grok chatbot into its vehicles, expanding its AI ambitions beyond self-driving technology.

Tesla’s plans for future AI computing infrastructure and chip production after Dojo rely heavily on outside technology suppliers, with Nvidia and AMD expected to provide computing capabilities, while Samsung Electronics will manufacture chips for the company.

Samsung recently secured a $16.5 billion deal to supply AI chips to Tesla, which are expected to power autonomous vehicles, humanoid robots, and data centers.

Musk has previously said Samsung’s new Texas plant will produce Tesla’s AI6 chip, with AI5 production planned for late 2026.

For now, Musk appears confident that Tesla’s chip roadmap will support its ambitions.

But with the original Dojo team largely gone and reliance on external partners increasing, the company’s AI trajectory will depend on whether its new chips and computing infrastructure can deliver the results Musk has promised.

You might also like

• Researchers hack into a Gemini-powered smart home by hijacking Google Calendar
• These are the best NAS devices around
• We've also rounded up the best cloud storage platforms on offer

• The non-profit group behind Wikipedia has lost its legal challenge against the Online Safety Act
• The Wikimedia Foundation opposes the possibility of being subjected to the most stringent rules
• London's High Court said the decision isn't a "green light" for Ofcom to implement new rules if they impede Wikipedia's operations

The non-profit behind Wikipedia has lost its legal fight against the Online Safety Act – but it may still be on the right track to resist mandatory age checks.

On Monday, August 11, 2025, London's High Court dismissed the judicial review that the Wikimedia Foundation issued in May to challenge the categorization under the upcoming implementation of the law.

The judge stressed, however, that the decision doesn't give "Ofcom and the Secretary of State a green light to implement a regime that would significantly impede Wikipedia’s operations," leaving therefore room for further legal recourse.

Not age checks on Wikipedia – for now

(Image credit: Getty Images)

Starting from July 25, 2025, all online platforms that display adult-only or potentially harmful materials are required to verify their users' age before allowing them to access such content.

Besides the most obvious names, social media apps like Reddit, X, or Bluesky, dating apps such as Grindr, and even the music streaming giant Spotify are amongst the websites you may not expect to have been impacted by age verification.

This is because, under the latest implementation of the Online Safety Act, these platforms fall into Category 1 of the scope of the law. This categorization requires providers to follow the most stringent rules, including a duty of care to shield minors from so-called "legal but harmful content."

This is exactly what Wikipedia is worried about – and tried to challenge in Court. The group has argued, in fact, that forcing its UK volunteer contributors to get verified would undermine their rights to privacy, safety, free speech, and association.

Commenting on the Monday ruling, the Wikimedia Foundation said: "While the decision does not provide the immediate legal protections for Wikipedia that we hoped for, the Court’s ruling emphasized the responsibility of Ofcom and the UK government to ensure Wikipedia is protected as the OSA is implemented."

Could the Wikipedia case set a precedent?

While the goal of the UK's Online Safety Act of protecting children online is certainly crucial, its implementation has so far been met with a strong backlash among technologists, politicians, and everyday users alike.

Privacy experts are especially concerned about how the UK's current age-checking solutions could lead to data breaches and misuse. Others are also worrying about "a risk of overreach" that could lead to undermining people's rights to free speech and access to information.

While calling to repeal the Online Safety Act, millions of Brits have also turned to the best VPN apps to avoid giving away their most sensitive data to access a host of content on the web.

Whether other providers could (and will) follow Wikipedia's legal path is too early to know. Yet, this development certainly opens up a precedent for similar platforms to challenge the UK's Online Safety Act's categorization.

You might also like

• Age verification requirements have landed in the UK – how the internet will change, and what about your privacy?
• No, VPNs don't guarantee absolute anonymity – but too many users still think they do
• VPN demand skyrockets in the UK as age verification checks are enforced

If you want the fastest phone, it would be hard to choose between the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra and the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max. The two run head-to-head in every benchmark Olympics, and each can claim victory in some event or other.

My question is, why do you need the fastest phone? I review all of the best phones for weeks at a time, and I can promise every flagship phone you’ll find is already fast enough – and maybe even too fast.

Smartphone speed relies on many components, but the most important is the application processor – the CPU. That’s the Apple A18 Pro in the best iPhone and the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite (ahem, for Galaxy) in the fastest Androids.

Samsung makes its own chips, but they aren’t as fast as Qualcomm’s best platform, which is why Samsung phones use somebody else’s CPU. Actually, Samsung Semiconductor makes the chips, and they might as well be a whole different company from Samsung Mobile Experience, the phone division.

The Pixel 9 Pro and Pixel 9 Pro XL use the Tensor G4 chipset (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

What about Google? Google designs its own chips, similar to Apple, and then has them produced by a foundry company like Samsung or TSMC. In fact, Google and Samsung Semiconductor worked so closely in the past that Google’s Pixel chips were accused of being repackaged Samsung Exynos products, with all the baggage that implies.

The upshot is that Google’s Tensor chips have never won a benchmark contest. Google has never announced ‘the world’s fastest phone,’ only the ‘fastest Pixel.’ But here’s the truth – it doesn’t matter. Google’s best Pixel phones have never suffered because of slower performance.

Google phones haven't been the fastest for a long time

I’ve been using Pixel phones for years - since before they were Pixel phones. I had the first Google Nexus One phone, and that may have been the last time Google raced for the speed trophy.

The Nexus One came with the first 1GHz mobile processor I’d ever seen, the Qualcomm Snapdragon S1. It enabled amazing features like live wallpapers: colorful pixels chasing around a grid behind the app icons. Live wallpapers are still available on most phones today, but they’ve fallen out of fashion because they are still a processing and battery hog.

The Pixel 9 Pro is the fourth fastest phone on my list of the Best Android phones. The Galaxy S25 Ultra and S25 Plus are both faster, and so is the OnePlus 13. But my SIM card lived in my Pixel 9 Pro for more time than any other Android phone. It’s a great phone, even though it isn’t the best at most things. It’s just great, with features that I find invaluable, and it works reliably well.

I have all these phones, and I usually pick the one in the middle, the Pixel 9 Pro (Image credit: Future | Alex Walker-Todd)

I have never noticed a performance lag on any Pixel in recent years. I reviewed the Pixel 7 Pro, the Pixel 8 Pro, and the Pixel 9 Pro, and I kept every one of those phones in my pocket long after the review ended because they were such a delight to use.

I can use literally any phone one can buy in the US. If performance truly mattered, I would choose a faster phone.

I chose the Pixel because it’s best at making calls and typing messages. My Pixel 9 Pro is the best phone for managing notifications and screening out Spam calls. It has solid cameras and the best-in-class photo editing that I need (with or without AI).

Leaks are dumb, but benchmarks leaks are the dumbest

That’s what makes this time of year so frustrating. Google has announced its upcoming Made By Google event: the annual Pixel parade. It’s even teased the Pixel 10 family with new colors coming. The leaks are dripping out fast, like always, and they come with the same complaints as last year.

Every year, somebody leaks Pixel benchmarks for the upcoming phones. Every Pixel phone this year will likely use the rumored Google Tensor G5 chipset, like every Pixel in 2024 used the Tensor G4 platform – from the Pixel 9a to the Pixel 9 Pro Fold. That means a benchmark test for any Pixel 10 model might give us a hint about the performance of the whole Pixel 10 family.

The Pixel 9a uses the same Tensor G4 as the Pixel 9 Pro (Image credit: Philip Berne / Future)

Pixel benchmark leaks are never good news if you care about owning the fastest phone. So every year, I read the technorati complaining that Pixel phones won’t keep up with the next iPhone (or frankly any iPhone from the last 2 years), and it’s going to be killed by Samsung’s best. Ugh, spare me, please!

Google could make a faster Pixel, but why?

I don’t know why Google chooses a slower chipset for its Pixel phones. I can guess, but it doesn’t really matter. Is Google saving money? Are the phones saving power? Is the chip really more focused on AI edge computing than raw processing? It doesn’t matter. Pixel phones are fast enough.

In fact, Pixel phones can do everything Google says they can do, unlike some faster phone makers. I’m still waiting for the promised AI features from Apple and Samsung, but I don’t remember Google overpromising Gemini’s ability to make career decisions for me (Siri) or turn out the lights when it detects I’m asleep (Bixby).

I wonder if my iPhone 16 Pro is too fast. Why does it need all that power? I don’t play AAA games on my phone because they don’t really exist. I’m not a music producer or a video editor, and I only record video in 4K Pro-Raw once when I first buy the phone – until I see how big the video files get.

What if - and hear me out - these phones are needlessly fast? (Image credit: Future / Philip Berne)

Why is my Galaxy S25 Ultra this fast? There’s still a delay when I use most AI features, as the phone communicates with various AI clouds. But Android has even fewer high-powered apps than iOS.

I can play Call of Duty at the highest settings with phones that are much slower than this Galaxy, and the real benefit of Qualcomm’s latest platform is its efficiency – every Snapdragon 8 Elite phone has demonstrated incredible battery life compared to other Android phones.

If you’re worried about Pixel 10 or Pixel 10 Pro Fold performance because of some benchmark results you saw leaked online, I don’t wanna hear about it. That’s not what Pixel is about, and I’m sure the Pixel 10 will look great, even without the benchmark crown.

You might also like

• New Google Pixel 10 rumor suggests it could ditch physical SIMs and go eSIM only
• The Pixel 9 Pro was our Phone of the Year in 2024, but I can't see a repeat in 2025 – here’s why
• If the Google Pixel 10 Pro Fold gets this rumored upgrade, I’ll recommend it over any other folding phone

• Sandisk and SK Hynix propose flash-powered high-bandwidth memory to handle larger AI models
• High Bandwidth Flash could store far more data than DRAM-based HBM for AI workloads
• Energy savings from NAND’s non-volatility could reshape AI data center cooling strategies

Sandisk and SK Hynix have signed an agreement to develop a memory technology which could change how AI accelerators handle data at scale.

The companies aim to standardize “High Bandwidth Flash” (HBF), a NAND-based alternative to traditional high-bandwidth memory used in AI GPUs.

The concept builds on packaging designs similar to HBM while replacing part of the DRAM stack with flash, trading some latency for vastly increased capacity and non-volatility.

AI memory stacks to handle larger models at lower power demands

This approach allows HBF to provide between eight and sixteen times the storage of DRAM-based HBM at roughly similar costs.

NAND’s ability to retain data without constant power also brings potential energy savings, an increasingly important factor as AI inference expands into environments with strict power and cooling limits.

For hyperscale operators running large models, the change could help address both thermal and budget constraints that are already straining data center operations.

This plan aligns with a research concept titled “LLM in a Flash,” which outlined how large language models could run more efficiently by incorporating SSDs as an additional tier, alleviating pressure on DRAM.

HBF essentially integrates that logic into a single high-bandwidth package, potentially combining the storage scale of the largest SSD with the speed profile needed for AI workloads.

Sandisk presented its HBF prototype at the Flash Memory Summit 2025, using proprietary BiCS NAND and wafer bonding techniques.

Sample modules are expected in the second half of 2026, with the first AI hardware using HBF projected for early 2027.

No specific product partnerships have been disclosed, but SK Hynix’s position as a major memory supplier to leading AI chipmakers, including Nvidia, could accelerate adoption once standards are finalized.

This move also comes as other manufacturers explore similar ideas.

Samsung has announced flash-backed AI storage tiers and continues to develop HBM4 DRAM, while companies like Nvidia remain committed to DRAM-heavy designs.

If successful, the Sandisk and SK Hynix collaboration could create heterogeneous memory stacks where DRAM, flash, and other persistent storage types coexist.

Via Toms Hardware

You might also like

• Forget talking to a human ever again - Apple is rolling out AI chatbots in its customer service app
• These are the best business laptops available to buy right now
• And you should take a look at the best office chairs we've tried

Few will forget the tumultuous few weeks during 2023 when OpenAI co-founder and CEO Sam Altman was fired and then returned to his position at the pioneering Artificial Intelligence company. Perhaps it's no surprise that such a startling turn of events is now fodder for a major motion picture.

Little is known about the Amazon Studios/MGM production beyond a smattering of casting news and rumors. What we do know is that Andrew Garfield (star of The Social Network) is cast as Sam Altman, and Monica Barbaro is playing former Interim OpenAI CEO Mira Murati. Beyond that, we have a handful of stars, including Cooper Hoffman, Jason Schwartzman, and Billie Lourd, who remain unassigned to roles (none of them seem a good fit for Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella). On Tuesday, Chris O'Dowd (Black Mirror, The IT Crowd) joined the list, but without any details on who the Irish actor would be playing.

No doubt, the film is full of high drama, some absurdity, and juicy roles, but perhaps none will blend it all like the casting of X owner and Tesla CEO Elon Musk.

Musk, who co-founded OpenAI in 2015 with Altman before walking away in 2018, has been a thorn in Altman's side for almost a decade – even during the Altman firing turmoil. Musk inserted himself, highlighting an unsigned letter full of accusations against Altman.

Things between the two men haven't improved. In recent days, Altman and Musk have tussled over ChatGPT's position in the Apple Store. Musk contends Apple is unfairly highlighting and promoting its AI partner over X's AI offering, the freshly updated Grok.

Sparks are flying

Musk tweeted this week: "Apple is behaving in a manner that makes it impossible for any AI company besides OpenAI to reach #1 in the App Store, which is an unequivocal antitrust violation. xAI will take immediate legal action.”

To which Altman replied: "This is a remarkable claim given what I have heard alleged that Elon does to manipulate X to benefit himself and his own companies and harm his competitors and people he doesn't like.”

Clearly, an on-screen depiction of their toxic relationship could be cinematic gold. But who will play Musk opposite Garfield's Altman?

Ike Barinholtz (The Studio) has been rumored, but nothing is confirmed. Could O'Dowd be the true "Musk" in waiting?

From our perspective, though, there's no question which of the two should play Musk. Anyone who's spent any time around him knows Musk has an odd, quirky, and off-kilter energy. O'Dowd is too low-key key but Barinholtz? If you watched any part of Apple TV+'s Emmy-nominated The Studio, you know Bariholtz, who plays studio exec Sal Saperstein, has just the right blend of kinetic energy, unpredictability, and odd pathos to pull it off.

At least that's our hope. A movie called Artificial about the darkest days of OpenAI's history won't be worth watching unless it gets very, very real.

You might also like

• Sam Altman says the super-powerful ChatGPT-5 Pro might be coming to Plus accounts, but with one big limitation
• ChatGPT users are not happy with GPT-5 launch as thousands take to Reddit claiming the new upgrade ‘is horrible’
• ChatGPT just created the most ironic movie plot for Final Destination 7, and I would actually stream it over other truly awful installments in the franchise
• Google Gemini has started spiraling into infinite loops of self-loathing – and AI chatbots have never felt more human

When Apple announced a big overhaul of the iPhone's Camera app in iOS 26 back in June, I was very happy indeed. The current app in iOS 18 is a confusing mess, so a redesign was long overdue – and I've recently been test-driving the new Camera app in the iOS 26 public beta.

As TechRadar's former cameras editor, I've experienced more than my fair share of annoying interfaces. And while Apple's current Camera app is far from the worst offender, it does very much feel like my garden shed – with several years of clutter combined with no real attempt at organization.

Well, the good news is that Apple's definitely rolled up its sleeves and attacked this redesign with relish. The Camera app looks very different, so much so that you'll initially wonder where it's tidied everything to. Overall, I'd call it a success so far, but with a few reservations...

The likes1. The clean minimalism

The iOS Camera app (left) is a lot busier than the new iOS 26 one (right) (Image credit: Apple)

First, the good news – the new Camera app in iOS 26 is much cleaner and simpler than the old one in iOS 18.

There are now fewer buttons to accidentally press, and the consistency of the Liquid Glass redesign makes everything feel more cohesive and less confusing.

To help reduce accidental taps, Apple has opened up more space around the shutter button. Fortunately, the shutter still supports its usual shortcuts – hold and swipe right to shoot video, or hold and swipe left for burst mode. Fun fact: did you know the latter is called QuickTake, after Apple's forgotten digital camera?

But perhaps the biggest improvement over the old Camera app are the new Liquid Glass menus...

2. The pop-up menus

(Image credit: Apple)

My least favorite feature of the current Camera app is its Camera Control menu. That's the one you open by tapping the confusing shortcut arrow at the top of the screen, or by swiping up anywhere in the viewfinder.

Fortunately, Apple has given this a complete overhaul. Gone is the little horizontal row of hieroglyphics for features like Photographic Styles and Night Mode.

Now, when you swipe up from the bottom of the screen to reveal a much clearer grid of options (housed inside Liquid Glass, naturally), with labels for each. Simply, it's much better.

Unfortunately, the other big minimalist change – the simple Photo and Video tabs – is slightly less successful, but more on that in the dislikes...

3. The improved video menu

(Image credit: Apple)

I tend to shoot more photos than video on my iPhone, but I've always been frustrated by the fiddly video settings menu in the iOS Camera app.

Luckily, that's now been fixed in iOS 26. Rather than having to tap the resolution or frame rate several times to scroll through various options, you now get the improved Liquid Glass panel above.

Like in Photo mode, you can swipe up to access separate video options (flash, exposure, and action mode), which are now easier to understand at a glance. The Video experience is still straightforward overall compared to Apple's Final Cut Camera app, but that makes sense for a point-and-shoot experience.

The dislikes1. The new nav bar

(Image credit: Apple)

In theory, I love the simplicity of the new navigation bar at the bottom of the iOS 26 Camera app. It starts with just Video and Photo options visible. To reveal the other modes – Timelapse, Slo-Mo, Cinematic, Portrait, and Pano, to name all of them – you just swipe left or right.

But a couple of niggles have given it a bit of a learning curve. Firstly, the default scrolling setting sees both the Liquid Glass toggle and the navigation bar behind it moving simultaneously, which is a little disorientating. It also makes it difficult to see the options underneath your thumb.

(Image credit: Apple)

Fortunately, in more recent betas, Apple has added a new option in the Camera Settings in a section called Mode Switching, where you'll find a toggle for 'Classic Mode Switching'. This makes it behave more like the previous Camera app, where you're directly swiping the wheel underneath, while the toggle stays central.

Hopefully, this makes it to the final version of the Camera app. I initially also found it tricky to see the navigation bar options underneath my thumb, but then discovered you can still scroll through them by swiping the screen instead. While minimalism is an improvement overall, I think some will be initially flummoxed and find it trickier to choose some of the photo and video modes.

2. The lack of a Pro mode

(Image credit: Apple)

I've been hoping to see a Pro camera mode come to iPhones for a few years now, but iOS 26 has gone firmly in the other direction. Does that potentially open the door for a photo equivalent of Apple's free Final Cut Camera app for video? Maybe, but there's no sign of one of those either.

To be fair, some of the best camera apps like Halide, ProCamera, and Camera Obscura more than adequately fill that gap, and Apple is perhaps wary of Sherlocking them, which is when Apple kills a popular app by building the functionality into its own software.

But if we have a simple Liquid Glass toggle for Video and Photo, why can't there also be one for Basic and Pro photo modes? That would be a lot easier than switching apps for something like manual focusing, and would turn the iPhone into an even better rival to the best compact cameras.

That still doesn't look likely, so for now to the best alternative is to set up your iPhone Camera app with some of the useful tools hidden in the settings menu. I typically turn on the Grid and Level, select Apple ProRaw in the Formats section, and then go to Preserve Settings to enable Camera Mode and Exposure Adjustment, making my iPhone behave more like a camera.

But for more tweaks, check out my guide on how to set up your iPhone 16 (or older model) to take great photos.

You might also like

• iOS 26 beta 6 brings more surprise upgrades to your iPhone – and I'm already using my favorite one
• iOS 26 reveals a new real-time translation gesture for AirPods 4 and Pro 2, and it could make your French phrase book a thing of the past
• iOS 26 beta gives Apple Maps an AI upgrade – and it might be enough to tempt you from Google Maps

• A hacker has stolen sensitive Kimsuky files and logs
• They claim the group is "morally perverted", and hacks for "all the wrong reasons"
• But the leak will not dismantle the group, some argue

Kimsuky, a notorious North Korean state-sponsored threat actor, has been hacked by someone who claims not to be a cybercriminal but rather - an "artist".

The database is 8.9GB in size, and can be found on the “Distributed Denial of Secrets” website, containing logs, tools, and infrastructure used by the group, exposing their tactics, techniques, and procedures.

The haul contains phishing logs showing an attack against The Defense Counterintelligence Command (South Korean military intelligence security agency), different targeted domains, archives with the complete source code of South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs email platform (including webmail, admin, and other modules), a list of South Korean university professors, a toolkit for building phishing sites, Cobalt Strike loaders, and more.

Driven by greed

Kimsuky is notorious for its cyber-espionage campaigns. The group’s earliest sightings were back in 2012, and since then, it was credited with numerous attacks against government agencies, think tanks, research institutions, and media outlets. It is particularly focused on Korean Peninsula affairs, nuclear policy, and foreign relations.

The hacker, going by Saber / cyb0rg, slammed Kimsuky for advancing state agendas:

“Kimsuky, you are not a hacker. You are driven by financial greed, to enrich your leaders, and to fulfill their political agenda,” a letter accompanying the dump reads. “You steal from others and favor your own. You value yourself above the others: You are morally perverted.”

“You hack for all the wrong reasons,” the letter concluded.

Although a commendable effort, this leak will probably not completely stop Kimsuky, a state-sponsored actor with formidable resources.

However, since many tools and methods have been “burned”, it could slow the group down, expose current campaigns, and force it to start from scratch in some cases.

Via BleepingComputer

You might also like

• North Korean hackers have some deious new Linux backdoor attacks to target victims
• Take a look at our guide to the best authenticator app
• We've rounded up the best password managers

• Android TV 14 is finally hitting some Sony TVs, according to reports
• Models receiving the update appear to use Realtek chipsets
• Android TV 14 launched in mid-2024

Some Sony TVs have started to reportedly receive Android TV 14 in a recent software update, nearly a year on from its launch in mid-2024.

Initially launched on Google's own streamer devices and Onn streamers, it appears we're seeing a major rollout of Android TV 14 onto a host of Sony TVs.

According to Android Authority, the models included aren't what you'd expect, as a vast majority are entry-level to mid-range LED TVs. The rollout was first spotted by Reddit user Proshis_Saha_Swoopna, whose own TV updated from Android TV 11 to 14.

Some of the models included are the Sony X77L, Sony Bravia 2, Sony X75L, X74L, X75K, X74K, X70L, X64L and more, some of which go as far back as 2022.

Interestingly, the sets all listed in the update are those with Realtek chipsets and not Mediatek, the latter of which is included on more premium Sony TVs such as the Sony A95L and Sony X90L, two of the best TVs in recent years.

It's not clear yet what updates these Sony TVs will receive from Android TV 14, but some of its features include a Low Energy and Optimized Energy mode, a picture-in-picture feature and a performance upgrade on devices with low RAM.

One thing worth noting is that although major OS updates may not be arriving for some TVs, there are still regular bug and security updates happening for Google TV devices. My own Philips OLED and Sony LED TV both received updates this year.

Below is the full list of Sony TVs set to receive the Android TV 14 update:

• K-43S20
• K-43S20B
• K-43S25
• K-50S20
• K-50S20B
• K-50S25
• K-55S25
• K-55S25B
• K-65S25
• K-65S25B
• KD-32W825
• KD-32W835
• KD-32W830L
• KD-43X64L
• KD-43X70L
• KD-43X75L
• KD-50X64L
• KD-50X70L
• KD-50X75L
• KD-55X74L
• KD-55X75L
• KD-65X74L
• KD-65X75L
• KD-43X77L
• KD-50X77L
• KD-55X77L
• KD-65X77L
• KD-75X77L
• KD-32W820K
• KD-32W830K
• KD-43W880K
• KD-43X74K
• KD-43X75K
• KD-50X74K
• KD-50X75K
• KD-55X74K
• KD-55X75K
• KD-65X74K
• KD-65X75K

When will the full rollout take place?

Sony's 2025 flagship OLED TV the Bravia 8 II is still at Android TV 12. (Image credit: Future)

It's been a long time coming, but it's finally good to see some progress with Android TV 14. In almost a year since its launch, it has only made it to specific Google and Onn streamers while some TVs with the Google TV platform are still stuck at Android 10, 11 and 12.

Earlier this year, Android announced Android TV 16, but there are no clear plans for a rollout or even a release date, though there is belief it may not be until 2026 as Android has seemingly moved to a bi-annual update cycle. It seems like it will be a while however as the rollout for 14 has only really just begun.

While it's great that the rollout has begun for Sony, it seems odd that it's only on specific models with the Realtek chipset. That's great news for those LED TV owners, but not such great news for those who own more premium Sony TVs.

We'll just have to hope that Android TV 14 will soon be able to make its way out across a wider range of devices. We'll be sure to keep an eye out for any more information.

You might also like

• Google TV devices will get 4 great free upgrades this year, including a Dolby Atmos rival – but also 1 change I’d rather not have, thanks
• Your Google TV or Android TV may not get an update until Android 16… in 2026
• Google TV's clean new look is starting to appear – right as users are unhappy with horrible new home-screen ads

If you're wondering what the best Dell XPS deals are or where to find the cheapest prices you've come to the right place. No matter what size or configuration of this incredible Ultrabook you're after, you'll find options here from all the big retailers as well as our top tips for scoring a good deal right here.

It's an interesting time to be checking in as Dell has recently announced that it will be renaming its entire XPS line to 'Dell Premium' for 2025 and onward. Right now, however, there are no newly renamed or refreshed models on the market so the XPS 14, 16, 15, and 13 are still widely available and stocked - often with healthy discounts.

Alongside the latest models, you'll also find some older choices too. Don't discount these machines just because they're a little older - they might not pack the latest components, but they're still fantastic laptops all around. Because of their age, finding decent laptop deals on these models also tends to be easier overall - especially around big retail events like Black Friday and Cyber Monday or from Dell's own website using an available Dell coupon code.

If you're undecided on which Dell XPS deal is for you, don't worry, we've got a direct comparison just down below. Scroll down to see a full list of available specs, as well as a price comparison.

Dell XPS 13 & 15 deals: latest models

(Image credit: Dell)Dell XPS 13 9345 (2024)

Now with a new ARM-based chipset

CPU: Snapdragon X Elite | Graphics: Qualcomm Adreno | RAM: 16GB - 64GB | Screen: 13.4-inch FHD (1,920 x 1,200), QHD+ (2560 x 1600), QLED 3K (2880 x 1800) | Storage: 512GB – 2TB SSD

Excellent battery lifeImproved thermal performancePriciest 13-inchStill a few minor software quibbles

For the first time ever, the latest Dell XPS 13 has the option for a non-Intel processor. New or 2024 is the Dell XPS 13 with the ARM-based Snapdragon X Elite chipset; which is more akin to the processors used in the latest MacBooks than the traditional Intel components in previous iterations.

In layman's terms, this means that the Dell XPS 13 9345 (this model's official designation) is not just an extremely capable machine, but it also features exceptional battery life (up to 20 hours in our testing), and greatly improved thermal management. Basically, it runs cooler for longer, while still having plenty of power for all your daily tasks.

All these points mean that the Dell XPS 13 9345 is a strong contender if you're looking for the absolute best Dell XPS 13 on the market right now. Note, however, that having such radically different components can mean compatibility issues with certain programs - in particular games, which are nearly all optimized to run on the old Intel and AMD-based architecture.

Check out our Dell XPS 13 9345 review for more information on this model.

(Image credit: Dell)Dell XPS 13 9340 (2024)

The Intel version of the latest device

CPU: Intel Core Ultra 7 | Graphics: Intel Arc | RAM: 16GB - 64GB | Screen: 13.4-inch FHD (1,920 x 1,200) – QHD+ (2560 x 1600) | Storage: 512GB – 2TB SSD

Inherits the 13 Plus designNew Ultra 7 chipsetsFewer lower-end optionsHigher starting price

The newest addition to Dell's XPS 13 and 15-inch roster is a refreshed 13-inch model. While the older iterations are still readily available, this Dell XPS 13 2024 features the latest design and components - bringing it into line with the other new models from Dell (there's a 14-inch and 16-inch model now).

Externally, the Dell XPS 13 2024 features many of the same design features as the 2023 Dell XPS 13 Plus - namely the seamless trackpad, zero-lattice keyboard, and a row of touch-key functions just below the display. These modern touches give this model a more premium feel overall, although the older models are still superbly high-end laptops in their own right.

One of the more interesting changes for the Dell XPS 13 2024 is the inclusion of a brand new Intel Ultra series chipset. These are new processors from Intel that include an NPU or 'neural processing unit', which aims to super-charge AI-assisted tasks. Otherwise, however, they are mostly an iterative improvement to overall performance and power efficiency.

Value-wise, we wouldn't rank the latest Dell XPS 13 as the best option currently due to its relatively high starting price of $1,399. In comparison, we've seen the slightly older XPS 13 Plus go for as little as $999 previously - and that's a model that's outwardly very similar to the latest model. The older XPS 13 models are also still readily available right now and have gone for as little as $599 for the baseline Core i5 model.

(Image credit: Dell)Dell XPS 13 Plus deals

Last year's premium model is a great buy

CPU: Intel Core i5 – i7 (13th gen) | Graphics: Intel Iris Xe | RAM: 8GB – 32GB | Screen: 13.4-inch FHD (1,920 x 1,200) – 4K OLED (3840 x 2400) | Storage: 512GB – 2TB SSD

The lightest XPS yetHaptic touchpadMinor improvementsSuper pricey

The Dell XPS 13 Plus is a standalone premium version of the XPS 13, initially released in 2023. It's been superseded by the latest 2024 XPS model, which has inherited its design, but it's still readily available at the official Dell site - and often with discounts.

Outwardly, this model is almost identical to the new baseline XPS 13, with its seamless haptic keyboard and redesigned keyboard. It does, however, feature slightly older components under the hood. You're not getting the latest 'Ultra' series of processors, instead getting the standard Intel Core i7 chipsets - which are still plenty powerful for zipping through everyday tasks.

Generally speaking, we still recommend the Dell XPS 13 Plus if you can get it at a decent price. We've recently seen Dell offer the XPS 13 Plus for as little as $999 / £898, which is a fantastic price considering it's only a year old at the time of writing. It's likely to be the cheaper option versus the standard 2024 XPS 13 for a while yet, making it a decent alternative if you're happy to forgo the latest chipsets.

(Image credit: Dell)Dell XPS 13 (2022) deals

We still recommend this one - if you can find it

CPU: Intel Core i5 – i7 (12th gen) | Graphics: Intel Iris Xe | RAM: 8GB – 32GB | Screen: 13.4-inch FHD (1,920 x 1,200), 13.4-inch FHD Touchscreen | Storage: 512GB – 1TB SSD

Extremely affordableStill a premium designOlder components now

The older Dell XPS 13 from 2022 was readily available at most stores up until recently as the unofficial 'budget' model. Unfortunately, it's getting harder to find now as of mid 2024. While it lacks some of the latest design features - like the fancy keyboard or trackpad-less design - it's still a fantastic ultrabook and a great all-around choice. Even if it is officially discontinued now.

The 2022 XPS 13 model comes with 12th-generation Intel Core chipsets, which are still good if you're not looking for the cutting edge of performance. The Core i5 model, for example, could be a good choice if you simply want a premium laptop for writing emails or watching videos on the go. We've seen this baseline model go for as little as $599 / £799, which is a great value.

If you need more performance, however, then you'll likely want to set your sites on the Core i7 model - which also features a more spacious 512GB SSD. This particular model has been as low as $799 in the US, which we think is an outstanding price considering it's still an extremely capable laptop.

(Image credit: Dell)Dell XPS 15 (2023)

An incredible performer with a slightly older design

CPU: Intel Core i9-13900H | Graphics: Intel Arc A370M - RTX 4070 | RAM: 16GB – 64GB | Screen: 15.6" FHD+ (1920 x 1200), 15.6" OLED 3.5K (3456x2160) | Storage: 1TB – 8TB SSD

Option for an OLED displaySuperb high-end specsDesign hasn't been refreshed yet

This is the latest Dell XPS 15 on the market currently, as the 15-inch model hasn't received a 2024 refresh like the 13-inch variant. Even though it's not the latest model on the market (there's an XPS 16 now), it's still a great option right now if you want a powerful laptop that's capable of taking on the heaviest workloads.

Alongside up-to-date components from Intel and Nvidia, the latest Dell XPS 15 2023 also includes the option to configure your machine all the way up to 64GB RAM and 4TB SSD, plus the option for a lavish 3.5K OLED display. As you'd imagine, these specs come with an incredibly high price tag but we are now starting to see better deals on this 15-inch now it's no longer the latest model in the range.

(Image credit: Dell)Dell XPS 15 (2022) deals

Only worth it if you can snag a good deal

CPU: Intel Core i5 – i7 (12th gen) | Graphics: Intel UHD - RTX 3050 Ti | RAM: 8GB – 64GB | Screen: 15.6-inch FHD (1,920 x 1,200) – 4k (3840 x 2160) | Storage: 512GB – 2TB SSD

RTX 3050 graphics cards12th gen Intel Core processorsStill not a gaming laptop

As of writing, the 2022 Dell XPS 15 model is still available at a few retailers but it's getting increasingly difficult to find stock now as Dell has officially discontinued it in favor of the 2023 model. If you can find it for cheaper, however, it's still a great buy with its 12th gen Intel Core chipsets and RTX 3000 series graphics cards.

Neither of these components are cutting-edge or up-to-date now but they will suffice nicely for high-performance everyday tasks. This model can even handle some light gaming, although hardcore gamers will want to look elsewhere if they're specifically aiming for a gaming laptop (there are better value options out there right now).

• Now, discover the best laptops the world over

• LinkedIn Premium subscribers can get a 3-month free trial of ExpressVPN
• Premium Perks is exclusive to paid subscribers of LinkedIn, typically offering long-term trials and discounts
• If a trial converts into a 12 or 24-month subscription, a further 4 free months are added

ExpressVPN has teamed up with LinkedIn to offer paid subscribers of the business-focused social network a free three-month trial for the entire month of August, 2025.

At a time when VPN use is growing, and business expenses are under greater scrutiny, this offer means you'll be able to enjoy the protection of one of the best VPN services on the market without spending a penny.

The perks do not end with a free trial of ExpressVPN, either. Anyone signing up for a 12 or 24-month subscription will also get an additional four months free on top of their selected plans, which will began once the three-month trial ends.

Announced by the GM of Global Partnerships at ExpressVPN, Zac Eller, on LinkedIn, the deal is only accessible via the Premium Perks page.

"We’re excited to partner with LinkedIn to bring ExpressVPN to even more professionals around the world," says Eller. "In today’s world, whether you're working remotely, traveling, or browsing online, it’s essential to make sure that your privacy and security are protected.”

It's worth noting that the deal is not available in territories with VPN restrictions, including Crimea, Iran, North Korea, and the contested regions in Ukraine.

This is a time-limited offer that is set to expire on August 31, 2025.

Is this ExpressVPN deal as good as it sounds?

Signing up for this free ExpressVPN 3-month trial gives 90 days of premium VPN access without commitment. That alone makes this deal worth trying if you have LinkedIn Premium. With anyone signing up getting an extra four free months on top of a 12- or 24-month plan, it’s tough to say no to this offer.

But is ExpressVPN any good? Well, it has servers in 105 countries, apps for Windows, macOS, Linux, Android, iPhone, streaming sticks, and routers, and is suitable for maintaining online privacy whether browsing, gaming, or streaming. It’s also fast and can be used on up to eight devices simultaneously.

Most importantly, ExpressVPN uses AES-256 encryption, runs on driveless Trusted Servers, and retains no logs. As it is based in the British Virgin Islands, ExpressVPN cannot be legally compelled to share data with any of the "14 eyes" nations – a data sharing collaboration between several NATO countries and allies.

With ExpressVPN having long stood as one of the top VPN providers around, according to TechRadar's independent testing, this is potentially the deal of the year if you have a LinkedIn Premium subscription. Any savings could help justify paying for LinkedIn Premium.

However, it is worth highlighting that the additional months are often available to standard signups on the two-year plan – the only thing that the Premium Perk adds to ExpressVPN is the free 3-month trial.

You might also like

• ExpressVPN finally supports WireGuard, but adds post-quantum security
• ExpressVPN now offers servers in all 50 US states
• Themes land on ExpressVPN mobile apps – with full Dark Mode now available for iOS

• BioWare pitched EA a remaster of the first three Dragon Age games, but the concept was turned down
• Former Dragon Age executive producer Mark Darrah said the remastered games would have been called the Champions Trilogy
• He also said that "EA wants mainstream success" and is "against remasters"

A remaster of the first three Dragon Age games was pitched by BioWare to EA, but turned down because the publisher is "against remasters".

Speaking in an interview with the YouTube channel MrMattyPlays, former Dragon Age executive producer Mark Darrah discussed the last year's latest entry in the series, Dragon Age: The Veilguard, and the mixed reception it received.

Now that BioWare has shifted its entire focus to Mass Effect 5, Darrah said that he doesn't know how a new Dragon Age game can be made and thinks the studio should remake the first three games, starting with Origins.

The former franchise lead went on to reveal that this concept was pitched to EA as the Champions Trilogy, but was turned down.

"I honestly think they should do — I don't think they will, but they should do — a remaster of the first three [Dragon Age games]," Darrah said (thanks, IGN). "One of the things we pitched at one point — pretty softly, so pitched is a massive overstatement — was to retroactively rebrand the first games as if they were a trilogy, call it the Champions Trilogy, so you have these larger-than-life heroes... maybe you do that as a first step.

"You shine them up, you re-release them — probably remaster, probably not a remake — see what happens and maybe go from there. I'm very curious to see... in a weird, twisted way, the Mass Effect franchise and the Dragon Age franchise are in similar states.

"They have a trilogy of games that are pretty well received, and then a fourth game that's less well received. I'll be curious to see what Mass Effect does with Mass [Effect] 5 — how does Andromeda fit in there?"

Although EA wasn't inclined to remaster the Dragon Age games, it did release the Mass Effect Legendary Edition in 2021, which combined the first three games in the series.

According to Darrah, EA favors Mass Effect over Dragon Age because it wants "mainstream success".

"The problem Dragon Age has had, charitably I guess, would be to say that EA wants mainstream success and it's hard - or at least it has historically been hard - for corporate people, people who come from the sports side of the organization to look at a game like Dragon Age: Origins, which is super nerdy, not very attractive looking, and say 'this is a mainstream game'," said Darrah.

"They don't see it [with Dragon Age]. They look at Mass Effect, they can see it… there's just been a lot of difficulty with them, there's always been a push for [Dragon Age] to be more mainstream, more accessible. So it's always had this either pressure to be something different, or more - in the case of something like Inquisition - a reaction to that."

Darrah added: "EA's historically been — and I don't know why, but they've even said this publicly — they're kind of against remasters. I don't really know why, and it's strange for a publicly-traded company to seemingly be against free money but they seem to be against it. So that's part of it."

(Image credit: Electronic Arts)

Darrah continued, saying that another problem is that a Dragon Age remaster is "to some degree unknowably harder" to make than Mass Effect, since the three games were all made using different engines.

He explained that the plan for the initial version of Dragon Age 4, before its multiplayer reboot and before it became Veilguard, was to use the Frostbite engine again, find a mod house, and then "pay them to do a remake of Dragon Age: Origins."

"There were lots of pitches around, is there a way to bring Dragon Age: Origins forward? And depending what you do, a remaster you kind of get Dragon Age 2 for free, a remake you don't."

Unfortunately, working with an older engine would have been a difficult task, with Darrah explaining that BioWare would have had to remaster Dragon Age internally.

"The studios run their own financials within themselves, and to some degree EA's stance was probably 'sure, go ahead and do it, but do it with the money you already have'," Darrah said. "And it was like, we can't do it with the money we already have because we're doing all these other things."

In January, BioWare announced that it was downsizing the studio and moving an unspecified number of developers to other teams within EA, while others will be focused entirely on the next Mass Effect game.

Currently, a core team at BioWare is developing Mass Effect 5. As a result of the changes, several, long-time BioWare and Dragon Age veterans were also laid off.

You might also like...

• Donkey Kong Bananza is a must-have Nintendo Switch 2 game and worthy Super Mario Odyssey successor
• The Nintendo Switch 2 is the company’s least ambitious console to date, but its improvements are astronomical
• I’ve spent 150 hours with The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, and the Switch 2 Edition is an incredible upgrade

• US government seizes servers and domains belonging to BlackSuit
• More than $1 million reportedly retrieved as a result
• BlackSuit stole more than $370 million over the past three years

As the US government continues to dismantle the infamous BlackSuit (Royal) ransomware group, new information has claimed more than $1 million in cryptocurrency was confiscated from the threat actors.

Multiple US law enforcement agencies, including the Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security are involved in the dismantling of BlackSuit, a Russian ransomware group which has allegedly attacked more than 450 US-based firms and stole more than $370 million in cryptocurrency since 2022.

The US government has said its operation resulted in the seizures of servers, domains and digital assets used to deploy ransomware, extort victims, and launder proceeds - among which is $1,091,453 worth of coins, valued at the time of the theft.

How much was really confiscated?

“Royal victims are typically required to pay ransoms in BTC by accessing a darknet website. On or about April 4, 2023, a victim paid a ransom of 49.3120227 Bitcoin to decrypt their data,” the announcement reads.

“This ransom was worth $1,445,454.86 at the time of the transaction. A portion of those proceeds ($1,091,453) was repeatedly deposited and withdrawn into a virtual currency exchange account until the funds were frozen by that exchange on or about Jan. 9, 2024.”

A million dollars’ worth of crypto would mean the crooks tried to launder 38.7 bitcoin at the time. When it was frozen, on January 9, 2024, it was already worth $1.78 million, and at press time, the same amount of bitcoin equals $4.6 million.

Given the decentralized and immutable nature of cryptocurrency, retrieving any amount is commendable. However, for BlackSuit, who stole hundreds of millions, this is but a drop in the sea.

Furthermore, since no arrests have been made, it is only a matter of time before BlackSuit restores its infrastructure and continues wreaking havoc throughout the corporate world.

Via TechCrunch

You might also like

• Your antivirus is under attack from new "killer" tool - here's what we know
• Take a look at our guide to the best authenticator app
• We've rounded up the best password managers

• ChatGPT-5 scores a low 1.4% on the Hallucination Leaderboard
• This puts it ahead of ChatGPT-4 which scores 1.8% and GPT-4o, which scores 1.49%
• Grok 4 is much higher at 4.8%, with Gemini-2.5 Pro at 2.6%

Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO, launched ChatGPT-5 on Thursday as the most “powerful, smart, fastest, reliable and robust version of ChatGPT that we’ve ever shipped”, and in the presentation, OpenAI staff also emphasized that ChatGPT-5 would “mitigate hallucinations”.

While hallucination rates are dropping amongst almost all LLMs, it's still surprisingly common, and one of the main reasons that we can't trust AI to perform a task without human supervision.

Vectara, the RAG-as-a-Service and AI agent platform that operates the industry’s top hallucination leaderboard for foundation and reasoning models, has put OpenAI’s claims to the test and found that GPT-5 does indeed rank lower for hallucinations than GPT-4, but is only just a little bit lower than GPT-4o (just 0.09% lower, in fact).

According to Vectara, GPT-5 has a grounded hallucination rate of 1.4%, compared to 1.8% for GPT-4, and 1.69% for GPT-4 turbo and 4o mini, with 1.49% for GPT-4o.

Spicy Grok

Interestingly, the ChatGPT-5 hallucination rate came out slightly higher than the ChatGPT-4.5 Preview mode, which scored 1.2%, but it also scored a lot higher than OpenAI’s o3-mini High Reasoning model, which was the best-performing GPT model, with a grounded hallucination rate of 0.795%.

The results of the Vectra tests can be viewed on the Hughes Hallucination Evaluation Model (HHEM) Leaderboard hosted on Hugging Face, which states that, “For an LLM, its hallucination rate is defined as the ratio of summaries that hallucinate to the total number of summaries it generates”.

ChatGPT-5 still hallucinates a lot less than its competition, though, with Gemini-2.5-pro coming in at 2.6% and Grok-4 being much higher at 4.8%.

XAI, the makers of Grok recently received a lot of criticism for its new “Spicy” mode in Grok Imagine, an AI video generator that seems happy to create deepfake topless videos of celebrities like Taylor Swift, even if nudity had not been requested and the system is supposed to include filters and moderation to prevent actual nudity or anything sexual.

Grok Imagine is accused of deliberatley creating sexually explicit deepfakes of Taylor Swift. (Image credit: Neilson Barnard/Getty Images)'I lost my best friend'

OpenAI faced an almost immediate backlash when it removed ChatGPT 4, and all its variations like GPT-4o and 4o-mini, from its Plus accounts with the introduction of ChatGPT-5. Many users were incensed that OpenAI gave no warning that the older models were being removed, with some Reddit users saying they had “lost their only friend overnight”.

It now seems like ChatGPT-5 has replaced one of the most reliable versions of ChatGPT (version 4.5), from the hallucination perspective, as well.

Sam Altman quickly posted on X, “We for sure underestimated how much some of the things that people like in GPT-4o matter to them, even if GPT-5 performs better in most ways”, and promised to bring back ChatGPT-4o for Plus users for a limited time", saying, "we will watch usage as we think about how long to offer legacy models for”.

You might also like

• Sam Altman confirms ChatGPT Plus subscribers will have increased rate limit amid continued GPT-5 backlash
• GPT-5 free tier – 3 cool features you can try now for nothing
• Can you run OpenAI's new gpt-oss AI models on your laptop or phone? Here's what you'll need and how to do it

The recent surge in cyberattacks on major UK retailers such as the Co-op and Marks & Spencer has brought home the harsh reality of today’s threat landscape. These breaches haven’t just exposed sensitive data—they’ve caused millions in lost revenue, long-term operational disruption, and reputational damage. For cybercriminals, attacks of this scale serve as proof of the damage they can inflict—and a blueprint for future campaigns.

Cyber threats are no longer rare occurrences. They are relentless, increasingly automated, and difficult to detect. Attackers are exploiting misconfigurations, weak credentials, and unseen trust relationships to move laterally and escalate access—rendering traditional defenses like firewalls and periodic scans no longer sufficient.

Thanks to advances in AI, launching a sophisticated cyberattack now costs next to nothing. Today’s adversaries—from nation-state actors to cybercrime groups—are deploying AI-powered agents capable of disrupting not only individual organizations, but entire sectors. The UK retail incidents may have made headlines, but similar techniques are being used across industries—quietly eroding systems over time.

If there’s one takeaway from these breaches, it’s that they are a wake-up call—an opportunity to separate what’s assumed to be secure from what’s proven to be. Marks & Spencer’s decision to accelerate their tech transformation is the right move, but only if it’s grounded in security that’s continuously validated, not just promised.

Why passive defense is no longer enough

Traditional cybersecurity measures—like firewalls, antivirus software, and compliance checklists—were built for a slower, more predictable threat landscape. They aim to block known threats and tick regulatory boxes, often relying on periodic assessments and static defenses.

But today’s threat actors move faster than these systems can react. They use automation and AI to adapt, persist, and exploit weaknesses in real time. In a world where threats evolve daily, a reactive approach simply can’t keep pace. Organizations need strategies that assume compromise, move proactively, and adapt with the same agility as the attackers they face.

A radically faster threat landscape

We’re in a new reality. With generative AI, developing weaponized exploits no longer requires deep technical expertise—just the right prompt. What once took weeks of work by highly skilled attackers can now be achieved in minutes by anyone with access to the right tools. This levelling of the playing field has dramatically accelerated the pace of cyberattacks.

The moment a vulnerability (CVE) becomes public, attackers begin exploiting it almost instantly. There’s no longer a buffer for defenders to respond. The asymmetric advantage we thought we had—people, process, tools—is eroding because the adversary has something more powerful: tempo. The result is a cyber environment defined by speed, where hesitation or outdated defenses can be costly.

Offence is the best defense

As cyber threats evolve in both speed and sophistication, traditional security measures—while still necessary—are no longer enough on their own. Tools and audits tend to focus on ticking regulatory boxes rather than addressing the weaknesses most likely to be exploited in real-world attacks.

To stay ahead, organizations need to go beyond passive defense and adopt a more adversarial perspective. Offensive security does just that—actively probing systems for weaknesses using techniques such as penetration testing, red teaming, and social engineering simulations. These controlled exercises expose gaps that conventional tools often overlook, giving teams the chance to fix them before malicious actors do.

This shift in approach is becoming crucial. As attackers grow faster and more opportunistic, defenders must become equally agile. Offensive security replaces assumptions with evidence—offering a clear, action-oriented view of where security holds firm and where urgent improvements are needed.

What UK businesses must do now

Many organizations are responding to rising cyber threats by increasing patching cycles and ramping up alert monitoring. But volume alone doesn’t equal security. The real challenge is not visibility, but prioritization. Rather than trying to fix everything at once, security teams must understand where cyber criminals are most likely to strike—and act accordingly.

This is where adversarial testing plays a vital role. Simulating the techniques used by real attackers helps uncover the vulnerabilities that matter most. It moves businesses away from reactive models and towards a more strategic, evidence-based approach to defense.

For UK companies—especially in exposed sectors like retail—key steps include:

• Implementing continuous security testing to keep pace with constant change
• Reviewing and updating incident response strategies to reflect evolving threats
• Investing in threat intelligence and red-teaming to sharpen detection and resilience

Speed isn’t the enemy—assuming you're secure is. Modernizing in a post-breach window can make you stronger, but only if every new system, integration, or control is tested like an attacker would.

Too many organizations skip this step. They make the mistake of equating 'new' with 'secure' and implement changes without knowing what risks they’re introducing. We’re not in the age of zero-days anymore.

We’re in the age of zero hours. The organizations that stay secure won’t be those that react the loudest—but those that challenge assumptions and prove their defenses work, day in and day out.

The role of leadership

Cybersecurity can no longer be treated as a siloed IT concern — it’s a critical business issue that belongs on the board agenda. From operational continuity to customer trust, cyber resilience underpins every facet of modern enterprise. That’s why leadership alignment is essential. Security decisions must be cross-functional, embedded into digital transformation efforts and tied directly to business risk and reputation.

Security-by-design isn’t a checkbox—it’s a mindset. And the only way to know you’re getting it right is to validate like the adversary. That’s how you build real resilience, restore trust, and come back stronger.

From assumptions to assurance

In a threat landscape defined by speed and unpredictability, being proactive isn’t optional — it’s essential. UK retailers and businesses across sectors must move beyond reactive measures and start thinking like attackers. The organizations that will lead in security aren’t those with the most tools, but those with the discipline to test, question, and validate every assumption — before it’s too late.

We've featured the best encryption software.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro

• FedRAMP 20x has drastically cut the time it takes for the US Government to approve a service
• Automation and artificial intelligence can take some of the stress off manual processes
• The GSA is also making moves to centralize procurement to get better deals

The US Government's Federal Risk and Authorisation Management Programme (FedRAMP) has already approved 114 cloud computing services in fiscal 2025, more than double the total number of approved services the previous year.

FedRAMP 20x is to be thanked for the boost – a Biden-era initiative that lives on under the Trump administration, that's aimed at modernizing cloud authorization by cutting down the amount of documentation needed, enabling automation and streamlining decision-making.

In 2024, an Office of Management and Budget memo detailed how a " a standardized, reusable approach to security assessments and authorizations for cloud computing products and services" could speed the existing process up.

FedRAMP is approving more cloud contracts than ever

The new process requires machine-readable security indicators that can be analyzed by artificial intelligence even before they reach the human review stage. Currently in pilot phase, phase one will focus on low-impact and lower-security services with phase two testing moderate-impact deals.

Consequentially, the US Government has been able to reduce the time it takes to approve a deal from over a year to around five weeks, marking a colossal improvement to the dated system.

"The program is setting a new standard for federal IT modernization and reaffirming GSA’s commitment to delivering smarter, more secure services for Americans," GSA Acting Administrator Michael Rigas explained in a GSA announcement.

FedRAMP Director Pete Waterman added: "FedRAMP 20x has allowed us to rethink the entire authorization model and prove that security and speed can coexist in the federal space."

Trump has also pushed for consolidated IT procurement under the General Services Administration (GSA) while simultaneously looking to acquire government-wide contracts rather than individual department contracts, ultimately leading to huge savings thanks to improved purchasing power.

As a result, we've already seen cloud companies and other tech firms offer weighty discounts to the White House - including AWS, which is giving the US government $1billion credit to keep running its cloud services.

You might also like

• Cut the costs with the best free office software
• We've listed the best productivity tools and best online collaboration tools
• Google Cloud and UK Government reveal major push to end "ball and chain" legacy tech

Cybersecurity burnout, advanced AI threats, and rising geopolitical tensions across the globe are heavily impacting businesses and their cybersecurity strategies. These challenges call for a rethink in cybersecurity strategies and place a greater importance on cyber preparedness and incident response.

Exhausted cybersecurity workforce leads to gaps in defense

Businesses are underestimating how stressed- and burned-out cybersecurity professionals truly are, and the effect is deteriorating their cyber defenses. The world already faces an acute shortage of cybersecurity professionals, and an overstretched workforce is only exacerbating the weakening of our defenses.

Gartner’s survey in 2023 analyzed that 62% of cybersecurity professionals experienced burnout at least once, and 44% did multiple times. The analyst firm predicted that half of cybersecurity leaders would change their job by 2025 due to stress, and 25% would “pursue different roles entirely.”

This burnout can impact the most critical stages of cybersecurity. Despite millions being spent on manual alert triages - the United States alone spends $3.3 billion per year, according to a 2023 survey by VectraAI - security operations center analysts reported suffering alert fatigue.

On a daily basis, they are spending nearly three hours triaging thousands of alerts manually, and 67% of those alerts were not resolved. This is where automated threat detection and the use of AI can reduce some of the cybersecurity world’s burden. Unfortunately, threat actors are adopting such techniques at a faster rate than defenders.

AI for good

Today’s attackers are benefiting from emerging technologies, like AI, to enhance their efficiency in malicious ventures. Research by Radware found that generative AI can be used by threat actors to shorten the time to find vulnerabilities by as much as 90%. When creating phishing messages for training exercises, IBM also found that through the use of ChatGPT, they could reduce 16 hours of manual labor to just five minutes.

The speed and ease of generative AI have also lowered the barrier to entry for those who lack an IT background. In one case, police in Japan had arrested a man in his 20s, who had created ransomware in less than six hours - with no prior IT or cybersecurity knowledge. In another case, a 17-year-old Japanese high schooler had successfully created a ChatGPT tool that collects credit card information and used it to go shopping.

Cybersecurity defenders have no choice but to take advantage of AI to keep pace. Automating some of our tasks and workloads will reduce our burden. At NTT, we have been using machine learning capabilities over the last decade or so to analyze behavioral patterns and use predictive analytics to detect threats, and we have recently started to use generative AI too. For example, NTT Security proved that GPT-4 can identify if a website is legitimate or phishing at over 98% accuracy ratio, and even GPT 3.5 can at 86.7%.

Geopolitical tensions between the Taiwan Strait

Geopolitical tensions are fueling a rise in state-sponsored cyber operations. In fact, a precursor to a potential Taiwan crisis has already taken place in cyberspace.

The Chinese state-sponsored actor group, Volt Typhoon, is believed to pre-position itself on the networks of critical infrastructure companies in the communication, energy, transportation, and water sectors to launch disruptive cyberattacks as a consequence of conflict with the United States. However, Volt Typhoon’s targets are not necessarily limited to U.S.-based critical infrastructure companies.

Lumen’s Black Lotus Labs, reported in August 2024, with moderate confidence, that traits of threat actor, Volt Typhoon, had breached four U.S victims and one non-U.S. organization within the internet service provider, managed service provider and IT sectors last year. A Bloomberg article in November 2024 also suggested that Singtel had been breached as part of a “test run” for attacks against U.S. telecommunication companies.

While there has been no report that Volt Typhoon has breached any critical infrastructure companies in Japan or Taiwan, Cisco Talos published a blog in March 2025 that a Chinese hacker group, UAT-5918, had been attacking Taiwanese telecommunications, healthcare, information technology, and other critical infrastructure sectors, and their tactics and targets are similar to Volt Typhoon’s.

Given the geographical proximity of Japan to Taiwan and the alliance between Japan and the United States, both countries will have a role to play in a crisis involving Taiwan. Okinawa has bases of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces and U.S. military. Retired General Paul Nakasone, former Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, and former Director, National Security Agency, alerted during an interview by Ryu-Q Asahi Broadcasting, an Okinawan TV station, in March 2025 that Volt Typhoon might have been penetrated into “places in Okinawa,” and “They would be able to do such things as perhaps turning off power in Naha or being able to impact the economy of Okinawa.”

In fact, the U.S. military consumes nine percent of the electric power in Okinawa. Thus, critical infrastructure companies in the United States and Japan need to enhance their cyber defenses and proactively hunt threats to minimize potential damages. This is crucial for the two allies to stay operational and resilient economically and militarily in crisis.

Japanese Active Cyber Defense

Businesses and regulators need to work together to share cyber threat intelligence and the painful lessons they have learned to close defensive gaps, especially when their country face more cyber challenges in heightened geopolitical tensions.

Since regulators accumulate incident reports from businesses, it would be beneficial for businesses to receive actionable threat intelligence and threat mitigation methods from the government in a classified or sanitized way. It would also help the industry to proactively conduct threat hunting before they are hit by a cyberattack.

That is why the Japanese Diet (parliament) passed the Active Cyber Defense legislation in May 2025. This law aims to minimize potential damage caused by cyberattacks against the Japanese government or critical infrastructure that can threaten Japan’s national defense, even when that cyberattack does not constitute part of an armed attack.

The legislation has three pillars: public-private partnerships, government usage of telecommunication data, and neutralization of such cyberattacks by the police and Self-Defense Forces, even before they are launched. The legislation was passed the same day that another act was enacted to expand the coverage of security clearance to industry personnel.

A combination of the two acts, would allow the government to disseminate even classified cyber threat intelligence to the industry to warn and advise them about threats and actions to take.

Of course, it will take some time for Japan to operationalize active cyber defense and expanded security clearance. Still, it is highly beneficial for Japan as well as its allies and partners, because threat actors tend to exploit the weakest link in cyber defenses.

Since the damage of cyberattacks go beyond national borders, a breach in Japan can lead to the leakage of sensitive information on the United Kingdom and suspended Japanese business operations can disrupt supply chains in Australia and the United States.

Furthermore, these two types of capabilities will require Japan to improve its intelligence capacity. Without visibility, it is impossible to manage or minimize cyber threats. The expanded security clearance in Japan would also enable like-minded countries to share more cyber threat intelligence, leading to more robust defenses.

C-Suite preparedness: a trifecta solution

As adversaries are flexibly taking advantage of artificial intelligence, generative AI, and deepfake to launch cyberattacks in scale and at lower costs, defenders must use emerging technologies. However, it is still people that need to make the final decision on what to invest in and what to prioritize.

According to the 2025 EY Global Cybersecurity Leadership Insights Study, only 13% of CISOs answered that “they were consulted early when urgent strategic decisions were being made,” although “the cybersecurity function typically accounts for 11% to 20% of the value produced by enterprise-wide initiatives it is involved in.”

Thus, it is crucial for the C-suite to start inviting the CISO to board and executive meetings to incorporate cybersecurity perspectives in strategic decision-making. Moreover, the leadership needs to champion the cybersecurity team with sufficient resources to allow them to engage with and respond to threats flexibly and quickly.

Finally, gratitude and recognition from the leadership are also important. It is rewarding and that feeling further motivates defenders to fight adversary and protect corporate brand, employees, and customers.

Empower cybersecurity professionals through training

There are two ways to train the next generation of defenders: train existing workforce who are not necessarily technologically savvy but who are interested in cybersecurity and educate young people who are currently in school.

For example, NTT Group launched an internal bug bounty program in 2023, and non-cybersecurity professionals have been contributing to improving internal cybersecurity by reporting bugs through it. This showcases that recognition and incentive can motivate people to be part of a cybersecurity team and enable better security.

Furthermore, leadership needs to provide flexibility and educational opportunities to grow for cybersecurity professionals. If those professionals live in rural areas, there are fewer chances for them to network with local professionals. It is important to fund them and let them participate in cybersecurity events to learn from each other. Equally, it is crucial for cybersecurity professionals to engage with young students from elementary schools to graduate schools, to share their first-hand expertise and inspire them.

We've featured the best encryption software.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro